Anyone know when the Lucee 5 final will be released?

[JP]

We're waiting to upgrade from Railo 4.2 until Lucee 5 is released. I know it's been in beta for a while... just curious if anyone has heard of a timeline.

[Dominic Watson]

There's no official timeline, though obviously LAS are keen to release it as early as possible (while being confident in the release). What is causing you to wait? Avoiding the work of multiple upgrades? If for no other reason, I'd switch to Lucee now to get the benefit of fixes to the 4.x series that won't necessarily be making their way to Railo.

Dominic

On 16 September 2015 at 20:25, JP <jo...@redtopia.com> wrote:

We're waiting to upgrade from Railo 4.2 until Lucee 5 is released. I know it's been in beta for a while... just curious if anyone has heard of a timeline.

--
See Lucee at CFCamp Oct 22 & 23 2015 @ Munich Airport, Germany - Get your ticket NOW - http://www.cfcamp.org/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/01d1a843-3d02-44fc-ae71-e97410afc535%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Pixl8 Interactive, 3 Tun Yard, Peardon Street, London SW8 3HT, United Kingdom T: +44 [0] 845 260 0726• W: www.pixl8.co.uk• E: in...@pixl8.co.uk

Follow us on: Facebook Twitter LinkedIn

CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED - This e-mail and any attachment is intended solely for the addressee, is strictly confidential and may also be subject to legal, professional or other privilege or may be protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you are not the addressee please do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it or any attachments. Instead, please email it back to the sender and then immediately permanently delete it. Pixl8 Interactive Ltd Registered in England. Registered number: 04336501. Registered office: 8 Spur Road, Cosham, Portsmouth, Hampshire, PO6 3EB

[JP]

I'm waiting because I have a stable Railo environment (Windows/IIS/Tomcat/BonCode) and in my first attempt to migrate to Lucee on my local server, was not straight forward. I might give it another try, but I don't want to spend time on it if Lucee 5 is right around the corner.

[Terry Whitney]

While I am curious when this will come out as well, I am happy its just getting done and will be done when its done. This model is far better than ACF which rushes to build a product on a 2 year cycle and then spends the next 12 months patching all the problems they had as it was not properly tested.

[Peter Boughton]

> then spends the next 12 months patching all the
> problems they had as it was not properly tested.

Hah! If only!

CF11 has been out 16 months and still has numerous issues.


(But yes, the *longer* Lucee 5 takes the better, to make sure it's done
right. There's no point for anyone on Railo waiting for it.)

[Andrew Dixon]

> There's no point for anyone on Railo waiting for it.

Also I think the upgrade path Railo 4.x to Lucee 4.5 to Lucee 5 will be easier than Railo 4.x to Lucee 5 TBH, so I would say anyone still using Railo should upgrade ASAP given that there have been several Lucee releases with security patches for issues that are also present in Railo as well.

Kind regards,

Andrew

about.me - mso - Lucee Association Member

--
See Lucee at CFCamp Oct 22 & 23 2015 @ Munich Airport, Germany - Get your ticket NOW - http://www.cfcamp.org/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/20150919183408.000057e0%40sorcerersisle.com.

[Terry Whitney]

to HAH!!

I was being kind. CF9 let alone CF10 still have issues. As for 11, MEH!!

Lets destroy all that functionality we sold you as we kicked the original devs to the curve and now We are not sure how the hell they did any of it.

Instead, here is a great feature we spent maybe 10 minutes of integrating a third party tool into our application, and then we will spend at least half our time marketing it as such a great feature. Never mind the fact you can just go sign up for mobile development yourself, this adds custom tag, and you like tag. Its a big hit with all our Macromedia MX folks, and you should like it too. 

On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 3:25:07 PM UTC-4, JP wrote:

[Ed Sanford, ODI Consulting.]

Lucee 4.5 will likely break most sites now running Railo 4.2.  Nulls handling is different/error prone even with the flag turned off. 
If taking the plunge modify all cfparam and applicable cfargument calls from default="#myquery.field#" to default="#'' & myquery.field#". 
before porting the site.  Null may exist as a concept; but, far too few of the built in tags and functions know about it yet.  Variable not defined / not found may now be  translated as " lucee null value there but not really detected ".

Also, the events engine has issues but can be made to work (try putting your cfc in the same WEB-INF folder as Lucee's)  - plan on possibly some hair pulling to get a simple directory watcher to work correctly.

If your relying on plugins from 4.2, then don't upgrade yet - most of them have yet to ported to Lucee 4.5 and the bulk of plugins we might want probably won't be available until version 5 is production ready.
Railo plugins will attempt to install but fail to run in lucee - probably mostly do to differences in the context names and folder locations.
If you have the ability to edit your plugin, you can probably craft a Lucee version of it, given enough time and effort.

Bottom line ... ya, stick with 4.2 for existing sites until 5 gets past the beta stage. 
But, if need to port, take steps above, in advance, to reduce downtime; and, don't expect that to be all that is needed.

If your starting a new site, and don't need any plugins, 4.5 is probably better to start out with than 4.2, as there will be less to fix/change later. 
Also for new sites, set null handing to full.  It's buggy otherwise anyway.

On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 3:25:07 PM UTC-4, JP wrote:

[Scott Smith]

Can Ed (or anyone else) provide clarification to the concerns about null handling on 4.5? We are nearing the end stages of preparation for a server relocation during which we will be moving from Railo 4.1 to Lucee 4.5.  We haven't seen any major incompatibilities as of yet, but wanted to make sure I understand what is being conveyed about this null handling issue.  I created this quick snippet to test default behavior for arguments and params, and everything seems to be fine. Is there something I am missing here?

<cfquery name="myquery">

select 'test' as myfield

</cfquery>

<cfparam name="param" default="#myquery.myfield#" />

<cfdump var="#param#" />

<cffunction name="testNullSupport">

<cfargument name="arg1" default="#myquery.myfield#" />

<cfdump var="#arguments.arg1#" abort="true" />

</cffunction>

<cfset testNullSupport() />

<cfabort />

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Ed Sanford, ODI Consulting. <e...@odiconsulting.com> wrote:

Lucee 4.5 will likely break most sites now running Railo 4.2.  Nulls handling is different/error prone even with the flag turned off.  If before taking the plunge modify all cfparam and applicable cfargument calls from
default="#myquery.field#" to default="#'' & myquery.field#".  Also, the events engine has issues but can be made to work - plan on possibly some hair pulling to get a simple directory watcher to work correctly.
If your relying on plugins from 4.2, then don't upgrade yet - none of them have been ported to lucee yet - is suspect everyone is waiting for version 5 to avoid re-inventing the wheel twice.
Bottom line ... ya, stick with 4.2 for existing sites until 5 is ready for production environments.

If your starting a new site, and don't need any plugins, 4.5 is probably better to start out with than 4.2, as there will be less to fix/change later.  Also for new sites, set null handing to full.  It's buggy otherwise anyway.

If I had more time, I'd patch 4.5 cfparam, cfargument and assorted other functions to handle nulls intelligently, without generating unneeded errors; but, I work for a small shop and we don't get a whole lot of spare time; so, if someone with the time could do so, that would be a huge help to the community at large; and, would make it less painful for all of us Railo lovers to upgrade sites.

Not to mention, we still want to bring other CFML folks over too.  Maybe once we get to version 8 we can convince users of other languages to start looking this way.  Ability to run existing sites off the new server is going to remain more important to the long term survival of the project than adding new dialects, especially when there are not really any real benifits to using the new dialects. 

Right now, there's no compelling reason for anyone, in the CFML world or out of it, to switch over yet.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/9600f74c-7ea1-445f-a8d7-8b63bbca0ca7%40googlegroups.com.

[Jon Clausen]

The one issue I've seen in 4.5 is that structKeyExists() returns true even when an argument isn't passed to a function.  It's actually an improvement, IMHO.  I just changed those to isNull() and saved a few keystrokes.  :)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CADhKUgF0u9B%3DC6%3Dz2SKqJdgxi59J3kjFb5%3DRuJbF_H3atEbPGw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Scott Smith]

Is that with full support enabled? I have partial support enabled (as this was our Railo setting) and I do not see that issue with the following snippet:

<cffunction name="testNullSupport">

<cfargument name="arg1" required="false" />

<cfdump var="#structKeyExists(arguments, "arg1")#" abort="true" />

</cffunction>

<cfset testNullSupport() />

<cfabort />

If the issue you described exists with the partial support setting, that would be a huge undertaking to find all uses of structKeyExists for non-required arguments in functions. Hoping that is not the case.  

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/36A73C06-0282-43A5-8963-1DEEDC81FF2A%40silowebworks.com.

[Jon Clausen]

Scott,

I’ll have to dig in to it more closely, so consider me having spoken out of turn at the moment. I just tried it after starting up a Lucee instance and am seeing your results. The other day, though, I was working with the same server and config, and structKeyExists(arguments,arg) was returning true. Nothing fancy, just a loop over the argument collection was returning structKeyExists() as true for every argument.

I changed a number of fair number of references to use isNull(), thinking that it was a Lucee 4.5 issue, because of it. Not what happened then, but the issue is gone now.

I’ll see if I can duplicate it again and file a bug report. This particular app is still being deployed live on 4.2. I’m only developing with 4.5 at the moment.

That said, I haven’t experienced any massive issues with null support other than this one.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CADhKUgFx16vqjtB-7eJSWApiXB-HYboVAk0YR3FbUj6cgX_uGw%40mail.gmail.com.